Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the first week back after the parliamentary break to highlight government actions to bring down the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he cited steps including plans to cut utility costs. Unfortunately, Starmer’s economic PR blitz has been blown out of the headlines by the former US president, and his entirely different strategy to ensuring supporters get access to cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems very keen on adopting the Trump approach – which is likely a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be willing to say about Trump’s decision to extradite the Venezuelan president, and install a successor with someone expected to be more compliant with US demands, particularly in relation to the nation's petroleum sector.
Keir Starmer has refused to criticise the American intervention, and the administration has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as legal. Recently, all EU states apart from one nation issued a joint statement which, while not overtly critical, did stress the value of global rules, and by implication suggest Trump of ignoring it. It said:
EU members urge calm and restraint by all parties, to prevent a worsening and to ensure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The Union reiterates that, under any conditions, the principles of the rules-based order and the United Nations charter must be respected. Permanent members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the international security architecture.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was declining to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was worried of antagonising Trump, the minister responded:
Absolutely not. UK ministers are and will remain in conversations with the Americans. And it’s for the Americans to lay out the legal basis for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with key partners looking at the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an appearance on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a ex- shadow attorney general), said she was very concerned about the way Trump seems to think, like the Russian leader and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his area of control.
Asked about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a government member, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
The Prime Minister may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the US administration. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a valid excuse.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: The Scottish first minister, gives a address in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm respectively. All the leaders are gearing up to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a tour in Berkshire where he is scheduled to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is anticipated to give a statement to MPs about the ongoing situation.
